JUDGMENT

Rajendra Babu, J.-Whether the Appellant is a badli worker and, if so, is he entitled to be absorbed in the Respondent bank is the matter for judgment in this case.

2. Appellant s case is as follows. That he was appointed as a Badli Subordinate Staff/Sepoy against one permanent vacancy in the Shyamsundar Branch of the Bank of India on 30/10/1988 and worked there up to 16/04/1991, for about 492 days. On 16/4/1991 the Branch Manager of the bank asked him not to work anymore. Later he made a representation to the Zonal Manager requesting to appoint him as a regular employee in the bank by quoting the circular No. XVIII/90/20 dated 7th September 1990 of the Federation of the Bank which referred to absorption of Badli Sepoys and the bipartite agreement entered between management and Union regarding the same which provides that :

"...a Badli worker who has more than 240 days worked in the permanent vacancy after February 1988 in a block of 12 months would be absorbed against clear vacancy as and when they arise."

3. Since he did not receive any reply from the Bank, he moved a writ petition before the High Court seeking a direction to the bank for absorbing him as a regular employee.

4